When the worm turns How we reinforce past choices

Tipping point: sometimes an outcome is so bad that you flip to become a vociferous critic. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

February 28, 2017

David Rawlings poses the question: if the reality of “control” turns out to be different from the promise will people change their minds?

Left-wing or right-wing. Socialist or capitalist. Brexiter or Remainer. These labels represent sets of beliefs that tend to be passionately held. So much so that they become badges of identity. They say something about who you are. Hence it’s hardly surprising that you hold on to them so tenaciously.

But it’s not just the big issues that we resist changing our positions on. We all share a remarkable preference for behaving in keeping with whatever we’ve done before, irrespective of how much thought went into the original decision or even how sensible it turned out to be.

Robert Cialdini (pictured) has famously written about the “science of influence”, a fascinating account, backed up by the astonishing results of years of research. One of his Six Principles is that of “consistency”, which is our tendency to make choices that reinforce, or are consistent with, commitments we’ve already made. It may not sound too surprising that we do this, but Cialdini gives examples from research that take the principle to extremes.

In one experiment, researchers knocked on doors and asked householders if they’d be willing to display an advertisement, in the form of a small card, in their window. A proportion of people agreed. A few weeks later, the researchers were out again and contacting a wider group, including those who had been approached in part one, but also others who had not. This time they asked the subjects if they would be willing to have a large advertising banner positioned in their front gardens! Not surprisingly, virtually all of those being contacted for the first time declined. But amazingly, many of the first group, who had agreed to display the small card, also agreed to host an intrusive banner.

This (and other) experiments showed that people can be “conditioned” to make choices that they wouldn’t otherwise have made.

And the principle of consistency also shows itself in the way we tend to advocate the things we’ve invested in, irrespective of their true qualities. No-one wants to be seen as having made a bad decision so we’ll continue to look for the positives in, say, a product we’ve bought long after the faults become apparent.

But sometimes the outcome has been so bad that it crosses your threshold of tolerance and you flip to become a vociferous critic. “Don’t make my mistake!” you say whenever you get the chance.

In the physical world, many systems exhibit a “switching” behaviour where a seemingly stable state suddenly becomes unstable and there’s a jump to a new equilibrium.

In the 1960s, the French mathematician René Thom studied the different mathematical forms that allowed this kind of “catastrophic” behaviour. He described seven types of catastrophe. But they all share the characteristic that a smooth change in some parameter can, at a certain point, result in a discontinuous change in some other property.

You’d see this kind of behaviour, for example, if you measured the viscosity of water at different temperatures. As it cools, water becomes progressively more viscous (not much, but some) until at 0°C the viscosity suddenly becomes infinite. The water is no longer a liquid. In Thom’s terms, a catastrophic change has occurred.

And these jumps are common in human behaviour. We accommodate changes that challenge our beliefs. The principle of consistency is very powerful and, as in the example of the advertising banners, people will put up with an incredible amount of inconvenience before they will act against a prior decision. If the challenge is too great though, there’s a catastrophic shift and our language contains many expressions for this happening:

The straw that broke the camel’s back…

At the end of my tether…

Reached breaking point…

So far and no further…

That crossed the line…

These and many others all describe situations where a succession of increments, each tolerable, suddenly add up to an intolerable sum.

The response to crossing this threshold of tolerance may be very vigorous, even violent. But it might not be expressed at all, at least not immediately. If the shift is from a state of “coping” to one of “not coping” then the individual could either explode or just quietly break down.

The revolt of the “left behind” has been interpreted as a section of society being pushed to the point of changing their lifelong allegiances. The European Union (EU) referendum was an opportunity for them to make a statement. Now, will Brexiters eventually change their minds when the reality of “control” turns out to be different from the promise? Or was joining the EU in the first place itself the big example of initial tolerance being tried beyond endurance by later developments?

In leadership, you can take people in directions they don’t really want to go provided it’s in small enough steps. But eventually they’ll balk when the gap becomes too great.

News Bites

May to hold talks with Merkel in Berlin
Theresa May is due to hold talks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel as she seeks to make progress on negotiating Brexit. The PM will travel to Berlin for the meeting at the Chancellery. It comes a day ahead of a speech on Saturday in which she is expected to set out the “security partnership” she wants to maintain with the EU. The UK is under pressure to reveal more detail about the final relationship it wants with the EU. Mrs May and her ministers are setting out what has been dubbed “the road to Brexit” in a series of speeches. BBC news, February 16

UK aims to keep financial rules close to EU
The UK is ready to set out its vision for how it wants financial services to operate after Brexit and favours an ambitious “mutual recognition” of regulations to preserve the City of London’s access to the EU. Under Britain’s proposal, the UK and the EU would recognise each other’s regulatory and supervisory regimes and would have aligned rules at the point of Brexit, with a mechanism that would monitor any divergence. Three senior figures briefed on Brexit discussions in the cabinet said that the government will back the proposal, which is also favoured by Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor. Financial Times, February 16

Business leader warns May against harsh immigration policy
British companies are facing a recruitment crisis, with labour shortages hitting critical levels in some sectors, according to a business leader who has urged the government to produce details on a post-Brexit immigration system. Adam Marshall, the director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, said the lack of candidates for some jobs was biting hard, and he warned ministers against bringing forward a “draconian and damaging” visa or work permit system. Surveys by the BCC showed that nearly three-quarters of firms trying to recruit had been experiencing difficulties “at or near the highest levels since [BCC] records began over 25 years ago”, he said. The Guardian, February 16

Lecturers want ‘radical’ tuition fee review
University staff are calling for a “radical” overhaul of tuition fees and higher education funding in England in a review of student finance. Sally Hunt, leader of the University and College Union, says the review must be more than “tinkering at the edges”. The review, expected to be formally announced in the near future, follows a promise by the prime minister to examine the cost of university. Theresa May said the review would show “we have listened and we have learned”. Ms Hunt, whose members are threatening strike action next week in a pensions dispute, says there needs to be a “fundamental look at university funding”. BBC news, February 16

Shampoo ‘as bad a health risk as car fumes’
Shampoo, oven cleaner, deodorant and other household products are as significant a source of the most dangerous form of air pollution as cars, research has found. Scientists studying air pollution in Los Angeles found that up to half of particles known as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) came from domestic products, which also include paint, pesticides, bleach and perfumes. These compounds degrade into particles known as PM2.5, which cause respiratory problems and are implicated in 29,000 premature deaths each year in the UK. Traffic had been assumed to be the biggest source of air pollution. The new findings, published in the journal Science, led to warnings that countries may struggle to hit pollution targets, with most tackling vehicle emissions. The Times, February 16

US rejects China bid for Chicago Stock Exchange
The US has rejected a proposed merger between the Chicago Stock Exchange and a Chinese-linked investor group. The decision comes after more than two years of reviews by officials. The tie-up was initially approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, pending further approval by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). But US politicians, including President Trump, have said letting a Chinese firm invest in a US exchange was a bad idea. Under the proposal, the Chinese-led North America Casin Holdings group would have bought a minority share of the privately owned Chicago Stock Exchange. BBC news, February 16

Labour gets 16,000 emails in five days urging it to consult on Brexit
More than 16,000 people have emailed Labour over the past five days, urging the party to consult members on Brexit after MPs said the topic was being ignored by its most senior policy body. The emails from party members will be examined by the party’s national policy forum (NPF), which meets this weekend in Leeds, and whose members include the shadow cabinet and trade union leaders. Labour has set up eight policy commissions since last year’s general election, to consult members and develop policy, but none focus on Brexit. The party has said Brexit is covered under the international policy commission, involving Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, but that commission is not at the moment accepting submissions on Brexit. The Guardian, February 15